Can someone explain GCSE science(s) to me please?

[Kushanku]

DS wants to be a software developer/programmer when he leaves education. He had his heart set on doing an ICT diploma but my doubts regarding the value of this was confirmed on here yesterday. So apparantly, maths and physics GCSEs will serve him better than an ICT diploma.

So looking at the curriculum, what the hell does this science description mean??

----

Key Stage 4
Students follow 4 different learning pathways that depend on their KS3 Science National Test Results:

1. GCSEs in Biology, Chemistry and Physics.
2. GCSEs in Science A and Additional Science
3. Double Award GCSE in Applied Science.
4. GCSE in Science A.

----

Does he need to go for option 1 and if he did, does that equal 3 seperate GCSEs in Bio, Chem and Physics?

Its so confusing. He's a bright lad, I want him to make the most of the brain he's been given!!

1 3 separate gcses; grades tied to performance in each subject, ie he could get AAB

2 like the old double award, he will study all three sciences and performance in all three make up the grade. Unlike the old double award, he can get a different grade in each year of the course- AB rather than AA

3 a one year course, all sciences are studied and performance in each contributes to one grade

4 a one year course, more tied to everyday life for non science people, in practice a way fir less able students to achieve a better grade

Hth

Oops mixed up 3 and 4

Option 1 or 2 will take him into further education.

Mme is far more succinct, I need to go back to school lol

Definitely option 1 without any shadow of a doubt

Option 2 is double science as is option 3 but the applied replaces the additional bit, (applied is usually for the lower set) and option 4 is core science only ie the first bit of the double awards

Most schools will tell you that if you want to study science beyond GCSE level you should be taking the triple ie physics chemistry and biology at GCSE. Some will tell you that a double will be ok but it would result in a huge knowledge gap as the triple goes in to far more depth.

Option 1 generally means "extra" time doing science (as you're studying each subject as a separate GCSE, rather than squashing all 3 sciences into the same time it takes to do 2 GCSEs).

Depends on the school, but often this means that you lose one of your other options (as you use it to do the 3rd GCSE in one of the sciences).

If he thinks he'll want to do any of the sciences at A level (especially Chem or Phys), then I would suggest thinking seriously about doing the triple option (number 1) rather than the double (option 2).

If not, then the double option is sufficient, covers all 3 sciences (but in slightly less detail), and leaves him an extra option to play with.

Hope that helps a little, rather than confuses!! :)

My sons school fits Triple Science into the same time as double science, the group just have to work harder and faster!

Otoh there isn't as big a jump between as and gcse chemistry as there used to be

I don't find that double award students are as disadvantaged/have as much to catch up on as before - everyone has to learn mole calculations now for example

A good teacher will be differentiating anyways so as not to lose either the kids who've already learned something and the ones fit which it is new

Triple doesn't go into more depth. It covers more ground at the same depth. There isn;t a big knowledge gap, because AS follows on from Additional Science.

My Dad used to run a software company - all the programmers had Physics and Maths as pure subjects at A level and one or other of them at least to degree level.

He said that the IT/ITC graduates knew the idea, but had very poor practical skills as programmers and were unable to handle the problem soling /logic side of the job.

My advice - do as much maths & physics as possible to the highest level he can cope with.

Solving - sorry my v key is sticky

there are still good computer science and/or software engineering degrees that turn out programmers who can out-do the maths/physics people. but they are rare, AAA entry courses (usually maths, physics, one other) at good universities. IT degrees are worthless for serious developers and when I was recruiting I would probably not have read past that point on their CV.

note that games developers of any substance do have maths or physics degrees, or phds, because that work needs the actual maths and physics.